End state-sanctioned animal cruelty

Published 5:41 pm, Wednesday, February 6, 2013

Question: What would you call someone who intentionally hurts an animal, any animal, and locks it up to wallow in pain, fear and misery, leaving it to die a slow death, often after hurting itself further in a panicked attempt to free itself from its confines?

The state would call that person an animal abuser, and has laws on the books to punish him.

Strange, then, and tragic, that a person can commit those same behaviors, only this time out in the woods, and the state suddenly calls him a sportsman. It has laws on the books to help him.

It might come as a shock to some that we still allow animal trapping in this state, but allow it we do. Metal clamps that slam shut on an animal's leg, devices that squeeze a body tight underwater until it drowns, are somehow considered acceptable forms of hunting.

It is a cruel practice that belongs to another time. Yet recent efforts to ban trapping in Connecticut have met vociferous opposition from the state Department of Energy & Environmental Protection and so-called sportsmen's groups. It is hard, however, to see anything sporting about nailing a contraption to the ground that will cause an animal hours upon hours of torture followed by death.

Modern-day trappers like to claim that today's traps, including "padded" metal ones, don't cause animals pain. We invite any to provide a demonstration on their own limb as proof.

Padded or not, traps must slam together hard and retain a tight squeeze on a leg or paw to prevent an animal from getting away. According to animal rights organizations that have studied the practice, while the initial snap can cause injury, more severe wounds often occur as trapped animals struggle to free themselves. They break their teeth trying to bite the metal trap, rip their flesh and break their bones as they frantically fight to get away. Animals have even been known chew off their own foot to free themselves.

Sorry if you didn't expect to encounter such a gross image when turning to this page. But that is the terrible reality of trapping.

Most efforts to outlaw trapping have concentrated on the danger the devices pose to pets and even children. Indeed, a bill introduced to the Legislature last year was titled: "An Act Concerning Child Safety by Restricting the Placement of Leghold Traps." It was defeated (see letter to the editor: http://bit.ly/TLupBk).

It is infuriating to imagine a child or pet being injured (in the case of a pet, possibly killed) by a trap. But even if the devices posed zero threat to unintended victims (which trappers often claim), the practice should be unacceptable in a civilized society, regardless of the target. It is cruel to squeeze and drown a beaver to death for its pelt. It is cruel to attempt to control the coyote population by subjecting the animals to metal leg traps.

The subject of hunting has been debated on these pages many times over many years. That is an argument that will not end anytime soon.

But we should all agree that a practice as inhumane as trapping is wrong. Flat-out wrong. It is unconscionable that the state continues to condone such cruelty. It has no place in modern life. The Legislature should ban it, in this session.